Curt Doolittle

Form: Outline

  • A Short Course In Natural Law

    Simple Version: The Position of Natural Law in the Hierarchy of Laws of the Universe.
    1. Physical Laws – the laws of the physical universe.
    2. Human Law – The limits of ability in Humans,
    3. Natural Law: Law of Cooperation,
    4. Informational (Testimonial) Law – Laws of Communication,
    5. Sentient Law – Laws of Intelligence (pattern recognition).
    WHAT DO WE MEAN BY NATURAL LAW?
    https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/09/19/what-does-natural-law-mean/
    A DEFINITION OF NATURAL LAW
    https://propertarianinstitute.com/2017/01/12/definitionnatural-law/
    MORE ON NATURAL LAW
    https://propertarianinstitute.com/2017/03/29/natural-law/
    RETURNS ON COOPERATION: WHY WE NEED NATURAL LAW
    https://propertarianinstitute.com/2015/06/29/the-first-principles-of-propertarian-ethics/
    FIRST PRINCIPLES OF ETHICS: NATURAL LAW DECIDES THEM
    https://propertarianinstitute.com/2015/06/29/the-first-principles-of-propertarian-ethics/
    A COMPLETE SCIENCE: TRUTH , THE LAW OF INFORMATION, THE NATURAL LAW OF COOPERATION, AND THE PHYSICAL LAWS OF THE UNIVERSE.
    https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/02/02/truth-natural-law-physical-law/
    DIAGRAM OF THE COMPLETE SCIENCES
    https://propertarianinstitute.com/category/attributes/law/
    SCIENCE (TESTIMONY) IS A DISCIPLINE WITHIN NATURAL LAW
    https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/11/17/no-science-is-a-moral-discipline-within-natural-law-the-means-by-which-we-warrant-the-truthfulness-of-our-statements/
    THE GRAMMAR OF OPERATIONALISM
    https://propertarianinstitute.com/2017/02/20/natural-law-and-the-grammar-of-operational-language/
    GRAMMAR, SYNTAX, DATATYPES, and OPERATIONS
    https://propertarianinstitute.com/2017/03/23/propertarianism-datatypes-operations-grammar-syntax/

  • A Short Course In Natural Law

    Simple Version: The Position of Natural Law in the Hierarchy of Laws of the Universe.
    1. Physical Laws – the laws of the physical universe.
    2. Human Law – The limits of ability in Humans,
    3. Natural Law: Law of Cooperation,
    4. Informational (Testimonial) Law – Laws of Communication,
    5. Sentient Law – Laws of Intelligence (pattern recognition).
    WHAT DO WE MEAN BY NATURAL LAW?
    https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/09/19/what-does-natural-law-mean/
    A DEFINITION OF NATURAL LAW
    https://propertarianinstitute.com/2017/01/12/definitionnatural-law/
    MORE ON NATURAL LAW
    https://propertarianinstitute.com/2017/03/29/natural-law/
    RETURNS ON COOPERATION: WHY WE NEED NATURAL LAW
    https://propertarianinstitute.com/2015/06/29/the-first-principles-of-propertarian-ethics/
    FIRST PRINCIPLES OF ETHICS: NATURAL LAW DECIDES THEM
    https://propertarianinstitute.com/2015/06/29/the-first-principles-of-propertarian-ethics/
    A COMPLETE SCIENCE: TRUTH , THE LAW OF INFORMATION, THE NATURAL LAW OF COOPERATION, AND THE PHYSICAL LAWS OF THE UNIVERSE.
    https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/02/02/truth-natural-law-physical-law/
    DIAGRAM OF THE COMPLETE SCIENCES
    https://propertarianinstitute.com/category/attributes/law/
    SCIENCE (TESTIMONY) IS A DISCIPLINE WITHIN NATURAL LAW
    https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/11/17/no-science-is-a-moral-discipline-within-natural-law-the-means-by-which-we-warrant-the-truthfulness-of-our-statements/
    THE GRAMMAR OF OPERATIONALISM
    https://propertarianinstitute.com/2017/02/20/natural-law-and-the-grammar-of-operational-language/
    GRAMMAR, SYNTAX, DATATYPES, and OPERATIONS
    https://propertarianinstitute.com/2017/03/23/propertarianism-datatypes-operations-grammar-syntax/

  • Europe and East Asia ‘have Done Better’ Because of Territorial Advantage Within Geographic Fortresses

    Fortress Europa obtained non-territorial advantage by: A COLLECTION of hypotheses that include: a) europeans have higher neuroticism (creativity) b) europeans have lower clannishness (dislike of outsiders) c) europeans have dramatically reduced the size of the underclass ( produced a higher distribution of Iq, and lower distribution of testosterone) d) there seems to be a longstanding IQ advantage in the north and an intellectual tradition into pre-history in the british isles (the ‘athens’ of pre-literate europe). e) the yamnaya brought aryanism (realism, sovereignty, martial rule, hierarchical organization, testimony, jury, common law ) to europe. And that this has been our most meaningful competitive advantage. f) that each wave of europeans out of Ukraine has been as much an ‘improvement’ over the prior as each wave out of Africa was an ‘improvement’ over the prior – for the same reason; africa and the steppe are brutal evolutionary furnaces. As far as I know all these hypotheses survive all possible scrutiny without requiring a particular genetic advantage other than perhaps reduced clannishness common among circumpolar peoples. This is why I adhere to this solution. Because it does not depend upon ‘magical’ genetics evolving by accidental mutation in the european genome, but merely adaptation to local conditions from a marginally indifferent set of homo sapiens in the past. As far as I know all human variation is in intensity of expression of possibilities extant already in the genome.

  • Natural Law, Sovereignty, and the Restoration

    Mar 02, 2017 9:42am NATURAL LAW, SOVEREIGNTY, AND THE RESTORATION NATURAL LAW Testimonialism: Epistemology and Truth (Testimony), and Propertarianism: Ethics and Natural Law (Cooperation), and Natural Common Law (a grammar), provide the means of producing contracts (Constitutions), that are ‘scientific’ – which in testimonialism means ‘truthful’, and not open to creative interpretation by the judiciary. This ‘precision’ was necessary in order to increase the demand for warranty of due diligence against fraud from covering products and services, to covering information (speech). SOVEREIGNTY (WESTERN CIVILIZATION) Sovereignty (‘liberty in fact not by permission’), Market Civilization (association, cooperation, production, reproduction, production of commons, production of polities, production of group evolutionary strategy), and Western Group Evolutionary Strategy (Transcendence / Domestication), Provide an analytic explanation of the reasons for western rapid evolution in the bronze, iron, and steel ages. THE RESTORATION 1 – How we were met by supernatural mysticism, monotheistic religion, and pseudoscientific/pseudorational ‘religion’ by the people to the east, in each era. And how the current pseudoscientific came about. 2- How we can use Natural Law to restore western civilization, by reforming or rewriting our constitution and that of others. 3 – Including various institutional methods of producing commons truthfully. 4 – Including the necessity, under Sovereignty, of markets for the production of commons. 5 – Including the necessity of various policies under the group strategy of Transcendence So, given that we can use propertarianism and testimonialism to produce ANY government truthfully, what I THINK you are asking, is that if we chose to pursue Sovereignty and Transcendence to restore western civilization under strictly constructed natural law, what would be the optimum(?) end state? We can choose from any number of options, but the lowest risk is to selectively revoke, restore and amend the constitution and with it the judiciary, restore the monarchy and militia, reduce any ‘federal’ government to a corporeal insurer of last resort, with courts limited to dispute resolution on narrow forms of commercial non normative property; with a market for commons consisting of multiple “houses” representing various classes, (Territorial, Commercial, Familial, and Dependent) which vote by apportionment (put money to what they want), and any contract not opposed by the other houses on legal basis survives. In other words “a market” using some of the proceeds of “the markets” for the production of commons, that improve the returns in the market. My ‘belief’ (forecast) is that the proceeds of suppressing falsehood (by testimonialism) will be greater than the proceeds of suppressing mysticism (by empiricism). The converse question is that if you cannot provide warranty of due diligence of your words, then why should others tolerate them any more than whether they tolerate a lack of due diligence of your actions (services), or productions (goods)?f Every liar no matter how well intentioned finds an excuse to defend his lies. But why is it that we must tolerate lies?

  • Natural Law, Sovereignty, and the Restoration

    Mar 02, 2017 9:42am NATURAL LAW, SOVEREIGNTY, AND THE RESTORATION NATURAL LAW Testimonialism: Epistemology and Truth (Testimony), and Propertarianism: Ethics and Natural Law (Cooperation), and Natural Common Law (a grammar), provide the means of producing contracts (Constitutions), that are ‘scientific’ – which in testimonialism means ‘truthful’, and not open to creative interpretation by the judiciary. This ‘precision’ was necessary in order to increase the demand for warranty of due diligence against fraud from covering products and services, to covering information (speech). SOVEREIGNTY (WESTERN CIVILIZATION) Sovereignty (‘liberty in fact not by permission’), Market Civilization (association, cooperation, production, reproduction, production of commons, production of polities, production of group evolutionary strategy), and Western Group Evolutionary Strategy (Transcendence / Domestication), Provide an analytic explanation of the reasons for western rapid evolution in the bronze, iron, and steel ages. THE RESTORATION 1 – How we were met by supernatural mysticism, monotheistic religion, and pseudoscientific/pseudorational ‘religion’ by the people to the east, in each era. And how the current pseudoscientific came about. 2- How we can use Natural Law to restore western civilization, by reforming or rewriting our constitution and that of others. 3 – Including various institutional methods of producing commons truthfully. 4 – Including the necessity, under Sovereignty, of markets for the production of commons. 5 – Including the necessity of various policies under the group strategy of Transcendence So, given that we can use propertarianism and testimonialism to produce ANY government truthfully, what I THINK you are asking, is that if we chose to pursue Sovereignty and Transcendence to restore western civilization under strictly constructed natural law, what would be the optimum(?) end state? We can choose from any number of options, but the lowest risk is to selectively revoke, restore and amend the constitution and with it the judiciary, restore the monarchy and militia, reduce any ‘federal’ government to a corporeal insurer of last resort, with courts limited to dispute resolution on narrow forms of commercial non normative property; with a market for commons consisting of multiple “houses” representing various classes, (Territorial, Commercial, Familial, and Dependent) which vote by apportionment (put money to what they want), and any contract not opposed by the other houses on legal basis survives. In other words “a market” using some of the proceeds of “the markets” for the production of commons, that improve the returns in the market. My ‘belief’ (forecast) is that the proceeds of suppressing falsehood (by testimonialism) will be greater than the proceeds of suppressing mysticism (by empiricism). The converse question is that if you cannot provide warranty of due diligence of your words, then why should others tolerate them any more than whether they tolerate a lack of due diligence of your actions (services), or productions (goods)?f Every liar no matter how well intentioned finds an excuse to defend his lies. But why is it that we must tolerate lies?

  • Civilizations Developed Technologies for Clear Reasons.

    MESOPOTAMIA Which class rule evolved first mesopotamia: Warriors or Priests? (we know the answer) Which class emerged in control of rule? Did that class adopt the role of the other (conflate)? Did that ruling class conflate roles of religion and law? Now, the little rhetorical problem here is that I made the original statements about the tendencies of CIVILIZATIONS to make use of different TECHNOLOGIES of organization, and the unintended consequences of those rules. I make this argument in order to expand upon the differnces between western, fertile crescent, hrappan/indian, and chinese civilizations, and how our earliest assumptions about the world, man, the good, and the true, originated in the ancient past and still govern us today – with unintended consequences. And I make this argument so that westerners understand why, as poor people, small in number, lacking concentrate capital of the river valleys, developed FASTER (not first, just faster) than other civilizations in the pre-historic, ancient, and modern eras. Why is that? Well, I think I know, and I think it’s something we CAN know. Here is another example. If we read the inscriptions from the Palace Stele from Ur, the Cuneiform of Cyrus and Darius and his Son Darius (starting with the 27th or Persian Dynasty), with the inscriptions of similar periods of the Egyptians (just prior to persian conquest), with the writings of Homer and shortly after of the ‘Athenians’, or any of the greeks, with the writing of the romans, of the german law and myth, of the english law and myth, then what is the difference in the method of narration, explanation and argument? All civilizations produce some level of occult(experiential), religion, myth, literature, history, law, mathematics, and ‘science'(existential). But we can actually MEASURE that distribution. And we can easily determine the level of conflation or deflation (from occult down to science) that governance relies upon, and we can measure changes in the economies that result from those (a) distributions of use and (b) use in government. So we can MEASURE the consequences of say, how chinese rule changed when the migrated from empirical to moral rule. We can measure the consequences of the use of islam by the aristocracy and it’s use as a method of general rule. (btw: the fellow in the original thread does not know just how much knowledge I have of the ancient middle east, but I’m pretty sure it’s comparatively non trivial. and it would turn into a pissing match if I took that avenue with him. ) THE WAY WE SPEAK, THE METHODS OF NARRATION, EXPLANATION, ARGUMENT, AND DECIDABILITY profoundly influence us. And if we conduct rule by those different methods they profoundly affect us more. The problem is the means of rule by scientific law is expensive and requires a high trust low context society, and the means of mythological rule is inexpensive but only requires indoctrination in a high context but produces a low trust society. These are profound questions that explain our evolutionary differences. Curt

  • Civilizations Developed Technologies for Clear Reasons.

    MESOPOTAMIA Which class rule evolved first mesopotamia: Warriors or Priests? (we know the answer) Which class emerged in control of rule? Did that class adopt the role of the other (conflate)? Did that ruling class conflate roles of religion and law? Now, the little rhetorical problem here is that I made the original statements about the tendencies of CIVILIZATIONS to make use of different TECHNOLOGIES of organization, and the unintended consequences of those rules. I make this argument in order to expand upon the differnces between western, fertile crescent, hrappan/indian, and chinese civilizations, and how our earliest assumptions about the world, man, the good, and the true, originated in the ancient past and still govern us today – with unintended consequences. And I make this argument so that westerners understand why, as poor people, small in number, lacking concentrate capital of the river valleys, developed FASTER (not first, just faster) than other civilizations in the pre-historic, ancient, and modern eras. Why is that? Well, I think I know, and I think it’s something we CAN know. Here is another example. If we read the inscriptions from the Palace Stele from Ur, the Cuneiform of Cyrus and Darius and his Son Darius (starting with the 27th or Persian Dynasty), with the inscriptions of similar periods of the Egyptians (just prior to persian conquest), with the writings of Homer and shortly after of the ‘Athenians’, or any of the greeks, with the writing of the romans, of the german law and myth, of the english law and myth, then what is the difference in the method of narration, explanation and argument? All civilizations produce some level of occult(experiential), religion, myth, literature, history, law, mathematics, and ‘science'(existential). But we can actually MEASURE that distribution. And we can easily determine the level of conflation or deflation (from occult down to science) that governance relies upon, and we can measure changes in the economies that result from those (a) distributions of use and (b) use in government. So we can MEASURE the consequences of say, how chinese rule changed when the migrated from empirical to moral rule. We can measure the consequences of the use of islam by the aristocracy and it’s use as a method of general rule. (btw: the fellow in the original thread does not know just how much knowledge I have of the ancient middle east, but I’m pretty sure it’s comparatively non trivial. and it would turn into a pissing match if I took that avenue with him. ) THE WAY WE SPEAK, THE METHODS OF NARRATION, EXPLANATION, ARGUMENT, AND DECIDABILITY profoundly influence us. And if we conduct rule by those different methods they profoundly affect us more. The problem is the means of rule by scientific law is expensive and requires a high trust low context society, and the means of mythological rule is inexpensive but only requires indoctrination in a high context but produces a low trust society. These are profound questions that explain our evolutionary differences. Curt

  • The Devolution Of The American Experiment In Eugenic Civilization Through Immigration

    1) The english immigrants were germanic, and were eugenicists before the term was coined. 2) the german immigrants improved on the english, by increasing the numbers of germanic peoples 3) the scotts irish at least held onto our traditions. 4) the consequences of the potato-famine irish and catholic were severe (see New England) 5) the consequences of the italians were worse (see NE/NJ) 6) the consequences of the (eastern) jews were the worst of all. 7) the destruction of the souther black agrarian family was the tipping point. 8) the invasion by the Caribbeans, south Americans (Mestizos), and Muslims has been catastrophic. And now we are at civil war. How can we measure these things? In effect on law. Who caused it? Look at THE DATA. Women + Catholics. Whose idea was it? Jews.

  • The Devolution Of The American Experiment In Eugenic Civilization Through Immigration

    1) The english immigrants were germanic, and were eugenicists before the term was coined. 2) the german immigrants improved on the english, by increasing the numbers of germanic peoples 3) the scotts irish at least held onto our traditions. 4) the consequences of the potato-famine irish and catholic were severe (see New England) 5) the consequences of the italians were worse (see NE/NJ) 6) the consequences of the (eastern) jews were the worst of all. 7) the destruction of the souther black agrarian family was the tipping point. 8) the invasion by the Caribbeans, south Americans (Mestizos), and Muslims has been catastrophic. And now we are at civil war. How can we measure these things? In effect on law. Who caused it? Look at THE DATA. Women + Catholics. Whose idea was it? Jews.

  • MESOPOTAMIA Which class rule evolved first mesopotamia: Warriors or Priests? (we

    MESOPOTAMIA

    Which class rule evolved first mesopotamia: Warriors or Priests? (we know the answer)

    Which class emerged in control of rule?

    Did that class adopt the role of the other (conflate)?

    Did that ruling class conflate roles of religion and law?

    Now, the little rhetorical problem here is that I made the original statements about the tendencies of CIVILIZATIONS to make use of different TECHNOLOGIES of organization, and the unintended consequences of those rules. I make this argument in order to expand upon the differnces between western, fertile crescent, hrappan/indian, and chinese civilizations, and how our earliest assumptions about the world, man, the good, and the true, originated in the ancient past and still govern us today – with unintended consequences. And I make this argument so that westerners understand why, as poor people, small in number, lacking concentrate capital of the river valleys, developed FASTER (not first, just faster) than other civilizations in the pre-historic, ancient, and modern eras.

    Why is that? Well, I think I know, and I think it’s something we CAN know.

    Here is another example.

    If we read the inscriptions from the Palace Stele from Ur, the Cuneiform of Cyrus and Darius and his Son Darius (starting with the 27th or Persian Dynasty), with the inscriptions of similar periods of the Egyptians (just prior to persian conquest), with the writings of Homer and shortly after of the ‘Athenians’, or any of the greeks, with the writing of the romans, of the german law and myth, of the english law and myth, then what is the difference in the method of narration, explanation and argument?

    All civilizations produce some level of occult(experiential), religion, myth, literature, history, law, mathematics, and ‘science'(existential). But we can actually MEASURE that distribution. And we can easily determine the level of conflation or deflation (from occult down to science) that governance relies upon, and we can measure changes in the economies that result from those (a) distributions of use and (b) use in government. So we can MEASURE the consequences of say, how chinese rule changed when the migrated from empirical to moral rule. We can measure the consequences of the use of islam by the aristocracy and it’s use as a method of general rule.

    (btw: the fellow in the original thread does not know just how much knowledge I have of the ancient middle east, but I’m pretty sure it’s comparatively non trivial. and it would turn into a pissing match if I took that avenue with him. )

    THE WAY WE SPEAK, THE METHODS OF NARRATION, EXPLANATION, ARGUMENT, AND DECIDABILITY profoundly influence us. And if we conduct rule by those different methods they profoundly affect us more. The problem is the means of rule by scientific law is expensive and requires a high trust low context society, and the means of mythological rule is inexpensive but only requires indoctrination in a high context but produces a low trust society.

    These are profound questions that explain our evolutionary differences.

    Curt

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-21 11:08:00 UTC